It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
WASHINGTON -- The pharmaceuticals industry, which President Barack Obama promised to "take on" during his campaign, is winning most of what it wants in the health-care overhaul.
The final contours of the legislation are far from settled, but the industry, led by a onetime powerful congressman, has notched a string of victories.
Legislation expected soon in the powerful Senate Finance Committee will leave out cost-cutting steps as part of an agreement with the industry and the White House,
Meanwhile, a separate Senate committee voted this week as part of its health bill to give branded biotechnology drugs at least 12 years of market exclusivity, a defeat for makers of cheaper copycat medicines. "This is the best year the drug industry has had in decades," said Nancy LeaMond of AARP, the seniors' lobby, which is seeking greater price-cutting on drugs.
Originally posted by havok
Awesome. Big Pharma's win, we lose. Lets all celebrate!
How come I am not surprised? I despise the fact that these drug companies run this health care system.
We can't do anything about it.
I don't think there should be a drug "industry".
Scientists develop these drugs. Its these drug companies that exploit them. Then charge enormous amounts of money for cancer treatments, disease treatments, even aspirin in hospitals. Another conspiracy.
(edit to clarify)
[edit on 17-7-2009 by havok]
Originally posted by havok
Then charge enormous amounts of money for cancer treatments
Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Would scientists develop drugs if they weren't funded by a drug company?
Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Would scientists develop drugs if they weren't funded by a drug company? Maybe, maybe not - but certainly not at the rate that they do now. Having said that, I'm not sure we need all of the "new and improved" drugs that are developed.
Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
If these charities are developing anti-caner drugs, for example, at significant rates, then why are the costs still so high? Are they selling the discoveries to the drug companies?
Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Although I'm not siding with PhRMA, I'm not sure how we should deal with this problem.
Meanwhile, a separate Senate committee voted this week as part of its health bill to give branded biotechnology drugs at least 12 years of market exclusivity, a defeat for makers of cheaper copycat medicines. "This is the best year the drug industry has had in decades," said Nancy LeaMond of AARP, the seniors' lobby, which is seeking greater price-cutting on drugs.
It does seem reasonable to expect that drug companies should have an exclusive period because if they didn't then there would be no drug development. On the other hand, this comes at the expense of elderly people and people who are sick and dying and that doesn't seem right either.
What would you do if you were POTUS? Should the government have any say in private enterprise in the first place?
I don't have an answer to this problem.